More “Altering Future” Discussion Following AES “Amy” Post
This originally was going to be a comment in the discussion on AES’s Amy…Am I Wrong? post
The question is: Do the Losties affect, influence and have the ability to alter the future based on their existence in the past? (Assuming we all have common ground in describing the PAST as the year 1977, on a timeline that comes before 1978, 2004, etc.) A few of us agree that the PAST of 1977 is the PRESENT for Losties, despite some people’s calendar days looking like this…
Sawyer – Day 1: 12/24/04; Day 2: 9/23/54; Day 3: 10/3/2004 (even though he had this day already ‘last month’); Day 4: 9/17/2007; Day 5: 9/23/74; Day 6:9/24/74/…
Kate – Day 1: 12/24/04; Day 2: 12/25/04; Day 3 and on and on…Day 1003: 9/10/07; Day 1004:9/24/1977
Read that discussion to get up to speed, and here’s one of my thoughts.
Losthead said this: “They (the Losties) all possess knowledge of events to come.” Absolutely right, we will see what events that they effect with this knowledge as the season continues. Bottom line is, they ARE altering the past/future because they have the future knowledge they are bringing into the past.
Locke knew the date of his birth. He didn’t change the date of when he was born. But he did influence who was there in the hospital. Which leads to a random thought that’s been brought up before, and it’s similar to the Charlie dying conversation. Someone tried to run over Emily, Locke’s mother, when she was six months pregnant. Is that someone armed with knowledge that she is pregnant with Locke and they are trying to keep him from being born? As the nurse said, they’ve never seen such a young premature baby survive. So Locke survived the same way that Desmond saved Charlie repeatedly. And as Hawking told Desmond, the universe will always course correct.
I bring this up to add another question into the discussion that has to do with the characters: HOW does the universe course correct? We have gone on and on about different situations that we’ve seen (Desmond/Charlie) and hypothesizing what we have yet to see (Hurley and the numbers) because we are trying to support the idea of the future isn’t changeable by people entering into the past…and that there are certain things that are just “supposed” to happen or will happen no matter what people try to do.
But, every time we talk about this, we are talking about a special group of people! So, it’s kind of a wash in my mind. If you buy into the line of thinking that a “constant” can serve a purpose in not only saving someone’s life from brain explosions, but in actually rectifying a timeline of events, then why would we overlook the roles of the special Losties as constants, and to build on that, as the course correctors in place that bring the necessary influences between past and future events in order to affect the outcome of something very specific that is yet to be seen?